Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Quote:That's not the case, actually. QB's picked with the first pick have a higher rate of success than QB's picked after them. There's more QB's that do succeed after the first pick, but that's because there's a larger pool to do so with. There's also several that don't work out.
Now here's a question: What makes a win, where the other team doesn't give their all worth much of anything?
I'm curious as to why you keep mentioning this. Do you have a specific scenario in which you refer? Do you actually believe there are teams doing this on a regular basis?
Quote:When we could not get beyond our own 37 yard line in 3 quarters of football against KC in Game 1.
Please answer all questions.
Quote:1. When did it start for you? Was it at 0-1, 0-2, 0-3, etc? Just curious.
2. Will it be and has it always been this way for you all along?
3. If we get Bridgewater and we go 0-2 or up to 0-6 next year are any wins after "meaningless"?
4. How many wins do we have to have out of the first six games to make any after worthwhile and not tank again?
Edit to clearly define seperate questions.
1. The first game.
2. No.
3. No.
4. If we got our QB then no need to tank.
Quote:1. When did it start for you? Was it at 0-1, 0-2, 0-3, etc? Just curious.
2. Will it be and has it always been this way for you all along?
3. If we get Bridgewater and we go 0-2 or up to 0-6 next year are any wins after "meaningless"?
4. How many wins do we have to have out of the first six games to make any after worthwhile and not tank again?
Edit to clearly define seperate questions.
1: For me it was he moment we didnt address the QB position. Not that i wanted the team to lose at that point i just knew it would be a rough year given new defense,bunch of rookies, gabbert being gabbert. Mine wasnt a desire to tank just accepting that we would suck mightily. I didnt go tank mode until we got to 0-2. At that point i had seen enough of gaberhenne to know what was going on.
2: See first answer. But it will stay this way. In that i mean that i really wouldnt worry if we went 0-16 i just want to win 1 game to avoid that title being laid on us.
3: Sort of. Its about him developing . Much like Gabberts rookie year. It will be meaningless in the playoff race but not for the developement of our QB.
4: Again see above answer. Next year isnt purely about wins. If Bridgewater puts up respectable rookie numbers and keep the games competitive then people wont mind a 5-11 or 6-10 season.
That being said given this defense looking good and being young with our offensive pieces in place then my stand is the same as TMD's. I see no way we dont win at least 6 games next year if we get Bridgewater and only way he fails is due to injury IMO.
My ideal scenarios for the season were these:
1. Gabbert plays well enough to show that he is capable of being a franchise QB.
2. If Gabbert isn't the guy, we're bad enough to get an elite QB in next year's draft.
Quote:1. When did it start for you? Was it at 0-1, 0-2, 0-3, etc? Just curious.
2. Will it be and has it always been this way for you all along?
3. If we get Bridgewater and we go 0-2 or up to 0-6 next year are any wins after "meaningless"?
4. How many wins do we have to have out of the first six games to make any after worthwhile and not tank again?
Edit to clearly define seperate questions.
1. 0-1
2. It has not always been this way. But that Kansas City game was just further evidence that Gabbert is a colossal bust and wont amount to much in the NFL. I'm not a fan of tanking in general, but I'm not going to even lie -- I want this team to finally nab a franchise signal caller. I'm tired of watching all the three-and-outs. I'm tired of the sacks. I'm tired of the checkdowns. I want some legit talent at that position. If we have to have this one last season of suckage in order to get 10-15 years of quality QB play, then it's worth it.
3. I find it very hard to believe we'd be 0-6 with Bridgewater at helm, especially when he has weapons like Blackmon, Shorts, and even Ace. We'll probably grab a tight end in the draft too. But in a scenario where we are 0-6 with Teddy, I would NOT be for tanking. We have our franchise QB and we need him to succeed. Now if it's his third year and has not improved much (a la Gabbert) then I'd be for tanking again. But I cannot stress how great of a QB I think Bridgewater will be. He's going to be a good one.
4. In a situation where we lack a franchise QB, I don't think there's a set win-loss record to go by -- rather, do the eye test.
By the way, by no means do I think this team is tanking right now. We just really, really suck.
Quote:Started for me when we were 0-0
All jokes aside this is kind of true. At some point during that first game it resonated how bad we needed a quarterback for this team to have any hope. It's time for a franchise quarterback in Jacksonville
Quote:1. When did it start for you? Was it at 0-1, 0-2, 0-3, etc? Just curious.
***WHEN WE COULD NOT GET BEYOND OUR OWN 37 YARD LINE IN THE KC GAME (3 QUARTERS)***
2. Will it be and has it always been this way for you all along?
*** YES, I WAS UPSET WHEN WE WON A MEANINGLESS GAME A FEW YEARS BACK AGAINST INDY AND THEY WISELY CHOSE LUCK***
3. If we get Bridgewater and we go 0-2 or up to 0-6 next year are any wins after "meaningless"?
***NO, THEN WE TANK FOR JAMEIS ***
4. How many wins do we have to have out of the first six games to make any after worthwhile and not tank again?
*** IT'S NOT ABOUT WINS, IT'S ABOUT TRYING TO LOOK LIKE A REAL FOOTBALL TEAM *** WHEN THE DAY COMES WHEN WE CAN DISCUSS THE UPCOMING "MATCHUPS" ABOUT THE NEXT GAME AND GET NERVOUS ABOUT THE GAME IS WHEN I KNOW WE'RE BACK.
Edit to clearly define seperate questions.
***SEE ABOVE***
Quote:I'm curious as to why you keep mentioning this. Do you have a specific scenario in which you refer? Do you actually believe there are teams doing this on a regular basis?
Happens quite a bit. Teams relax against teams with bad records. Or late in the seasons teams sit their starters. Do we really want a win in week 17 because the Colts sit their starters?
Please answer all questions everyone. THE THREAD DOESN'T WORK UNLESS YOU ANSWER ALL OF THE REALLY IMPORTANT QUESTIONS THE OP MADE!
Quote:Please answer all questions everyone. THE THREAD DOESN'T WORK UNLESS YOU ANSWER ALL OF THE REALLY IMPORTANT QUESTIONS THE OP MADE!
You are correct, now answer the damn questions. If not stay out.
Let's be honest.. anyone who knows football knew Gabbert wasn't going to make a big step forward this year.. I don't want us to tank but I also don't want us to be picking 2nd and watch our QB of the future taken out from under us either.
I despise it when a team tanks. It doesn't really matter what the fans feel. They can think they are tanking or not. The Denver game showed that they are at least trying to win games.
Quote:You are correct, now answer the damn questions. If not stay out.
Say please.
Quote:If the team gets Bridgewater, at that point the new regime has started and you don't want losses. Bridgewater would get till the 3rd year in my book, before I would go down the path of tanking for draft picks.
Thats irrelevant anyway, since theres very little chance Bridgewater fails. The only way Bridgewater fails is due to injury, not talent.
I love how your so sure this guy is the next top QB in the league. I'm not saying he isn't good. I'm just not writing post after post about how hes this sure pick. How theres such little chance he fails in the NFL. A lot of people said the same thing about Blaine when he was coming out of college.
Quote:1. When did it start for you? Was it at 0-1, 0-2, 0-3, etc? Just curious.
2. Will it be and has it always been this way for you all along?
3. If we get Bridgewater and we go 0-2 or up to 0-6 next year are any wins after "meaningless"?
4. How many wins do we have to have out of the first six games to make any after worthwhile and not tank again?
Edit to clearly define seperate questions.
1.) Before the season.
2.) Started the middle of last year and will last until we pick a new QB.
3.) No theyre not meaningless, because that means our QB of the future is improving. Unlike this year where wins from a lame duck QB just put you out of position to take your pick from all of this years stacked QB class.
4.) When we pick our new QB I will not root for us to lose any games, even after a hypothetical 0-6 start. Because that would mean hes not improving.
Quote:I love how your so sure this guy is the next top QB in the league. I'm not saying he isn't good. I'm just not writing post after post about how hes this sure pick. How theres such little chance he fails in the NFL. A lot of people said the same thing about Blaine when he was coming out of college.
Who in their right mind said that Blaine was a sure pick?
I wonder how many of the people that want us to "tank" the season to get the franchise QB we so desperately need are actually season ticket holders who pay good money to watch a very bad football team. I know for sure that the people that sit around me in my section are not on board with losing just to get us a better draft position. It's easy to play this game when you have no real investment in the team, but quite another when you actually pay for it.
I would ask this question:
How many of you who want the team to tank actually have season tickets?
Regards...............the Chiefjag
Losing is not necessarily a bad thing. If Jags only win one game every other season, that win would make fans happy as if Jags have won a super bowl. How many teams can win a super bowl every other year?
I support Jags to tank this season, the next season and every season forever. Fans will feel good when Jags ONLY lose within two possessions. Fans will be happy if Jags force the opponents to keep their starters in the game for three quarters. How many teams can make their fans as happy as that?
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12